NBC's Misleading Post-Debate Poll

It comes to me as no shock that after that debate where Ron Paul only had 7 opportunities to speak, 2 of them being rebuttals, that NBC would alter the results of the poll.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/156bc2a40829.jpg[/atsimg]

While the percentage itself wasn't altered, the pixel length of the of the bar was inconveniently maxed out at 300. So while Romney was at 49% complete, Ron Paul was at 100%, making it look like they were tied. If a person would have read the actual votes they would have clearly seen that he was leading by a wide margin, but it's still very deceptive.

Here's a more technical analysis of the graph:

At the suggestion of animateclay, I looked at the HTML of the graph. There's a max-width:300px CSS declaration on the .ans_bargraph elements (the green bars) that's overriding the accurately sized percentage-based width declarations: Ron Paul's bar was at 100%, and Romney's was at 49% width when I checked, but RP's 100%-wide bar was being capped at 300px...which just so happened to look exactly like 50% in a 600px wide chart.

Here's what it should have looked like: [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fd6c9806c772.jpg[/atsimg]

And here's MSNBC's Public Relations phone number: 212.664.3720

Source

Im assuming NBC said on TV that this debate resulted in a tie even though their poll clearly shows Paul won?
Just from the graph, I take it as Paul winning by over 20 percent.


OK I see, it looks like the actual horizontal green bar is equal for the two front runners in this debate. Yea, that is strange - normally media outlets are all about showing clear winners and losers if only for entertainment value.

reply to post by TupacShakur


yeah i noticed that
its really not important paul winning this because they can pick how much coverage it gets in the media
most people wont hear about it im assuming..
would be interesting to see how much it would have been publicised if someone else won

reply to post by UniverSoul

yeah i noticed that
its really not important paul winning this because they can pick how much coverage it gets in the media
most people wont hear about it im assuming..
would be interesting to see how much it would have been publicised if someone else won

I think if any other candidate won, they would give it a good amount of coverage.

I don't watch MSM, but based on how they organized the debate I am 98% sure they just glanced over the results of the poll at best when they mentioned the results on TV.

I could be wrong, maybe they gave him the coverage he deserves, but come on, this is the MSM we're talking here.....I really, really doubt that they would make this a big deal let alone mention it more than once. Can any NBC viewers confirm/deny this?

You people do realize that Ron Paul has won EVERY online poll. Not only in this go round for the Presidential race but EVERY one held 4 years ago also.

Ron Paul has a very effective online poll spamming team. A majority of which are anti-war Democrats looking to make a point.

The media does not take these online poll wins for Ron Paul seriously because it is a fraud.

Go here to vote for who you believe won the debate....especially if you think it was Ron Paul.
I truly believe he's our only hope for fixing the political mess we've allowed to happen.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Originally posted by fltcui
Go here to vote for who you believe won the debate....especially if you think it was Ron Paul.
I truly believe he's our only hope for fixing the political mess we've allowed to happen.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Thanks for proving my point.

reply to post by Carseller4


You're very welcome.
I believe the poll results reflect the people's desires to bring this country back to where it should be. Less big government (that's where I believe you're wrong about the anti-war democrats voting for Ron Paul), more local control at the state level, and individual responsibility.

Originally posted by Carseller4

Originally posted by fltcui
Go here to vote for who you believe won the debate....especially if you think it was Ron Paul.
I truly believe he's our only hope for fixing the political mess we've allowed to happen.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Thanks for proving my point.

I was thinking the same thing.

Even though I am a Ron Paul supporter, and I believe a poll with 80,000 respondents should be given preference over a poll with 2500 respondents, I do agree the post you quoted is proof of the online presence of Ron Paul, and proof of the organized effort to skew those poll numbers.

However, that presence could evolve to real voters, if the online folks would get out and vote in mass! I hope it happens that way.

reply to post by Carseller4


Without going into too much detail, I can tell you this:

You can fool a few polls some of the time, but you can't fool all of them all of the time.

I have personal knowledge about polling software online, and like most intelligent design, there are mechanisms that prevent spamming of polls, such as checking your ip or asking for registration. Not every poll is equal and some do not put these measures in place but most do.

Ron Paul's supporters are genuine people and you can't go by polls alone, just get out and talk to people otherwise it is an informed opinion based on little critical thought.

~Namaste

You people do realize that Ron Paul has won EVERY online poll. Not only in this go round for the Presidential race but EVERY one held 4 years ago also.

Ron Paul has a very effective online poll spamming team. A majority of which are anti-war Democrats looking to make a point.

I disagree, the polls are being skewed by gutless Republicans who are terrified by what Ron Paul would do, namely bring regulations back to the banking sector and reign in spending by the Defense Department. Democrats on the other hand are terrified of him for threatening to reign in health care spending - but I doubt Dems are bothering to skew GOP polls. Sites like "The Daily Paul" are the ones throwing these polls off by launching campaigns to "stuff the ballot box", and then complaining the polls aren't accurate

FYI, MSNBC has fixed the misleading graph. Link to the official poll:

firstread.msnbc.msn.com...

reply to post by jburg6


I didn't take a screen shot but they only got it half right. If it were to be accurate RP has three times the votes that Perry has. That's not what it shows. I am totally unsurprised by this as they will do whatever they can to marginalize RP. That's been truth for years as anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see.

reply to post by jburg6


The bars still aren't right. Oh well, great to see him getting support.

By the way, if there are trolls spamming poll results, why would they be on Paul's side??! Spamming on Paul's behalf because they're "anti-war democrats?" Get real! This election has nothing to do with republicrats. It has to do with one man fighting for us vs. everyone else doing what their bosses tell them.
I went online and listened to his comments from last nights debate, and man, he sounded a whole lot better this morning without all the hot air in between.

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Originally posted by Carseller4

Originally posted by fltcui
Go here to vote for who you believe won the debate....especially if you think it was Ron Paul.
I truly believe he's our only hope for fixing the political mess we've allowed to happen.
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Thanks for proving my point.

I was thinking the same thing.

Even though I am a Ron Paul supporter, and I believe a poll with 80,000 respondents should be given preference over a poll with 2500 respondents, I do agree the post you quoted is proof of the online presence of Ron Paul, and proof of the organized effort to skew those poll numbers.

However, that presence could evolve to real voters, if the online folks would get out and vote in mass! I hope it happens that way.

So I wander off to see the link .....

First (plugged) political articles....

Analysis: Rock-solid Romney and pugnacious Perry make it look like a two-man race

First Read: Texas governor comes out punching at GOP debate, then fades; Bachmann sinks into second tier of candidates.

Fact check: Romney and Perry twist records
Analysis: Perry takes heat, keeps on smiling

Follow the "Analysis" link to the 1000-word article .....

Perry is mentioned 8 times....
Romney... 9 times
Bachman ... 4 times
Gingrich twice

Paul... not once.

I propose that the above list of 'mentionees' represents the electoral colleges' targets for candidacy in order of preference and likelihood.

First paragraph of the article

Breaking down last night’s slugfest in Simi Valley… Perry steals the show early and then fades… “Steady Eddie” Romney… Bachmann fails to break through… What will be Obama’s tone tonight?… His speech to a joint session of Congress begins at 7:00 pm ET… Perry campaigns in CA, while Gingrich is in NH… And David Gregory chats with Joe Lieberman.

Imagine that...

Well, at least the "real" potential candidates can't be accused of some vague "polling' fraud... they don't have to..... the media does it for them.

I've read a number of polls online and they seem to all have Ron Paul in the lead by very large margins. While I personally support Paul, this made me suspicious since my assumption is that, while he has always been loved by his followers, his isn't really known by average joes. Therightscoop removed Ron Paul from their results claiming 'bots' or other underhanded means skewed results heavily in Ron Paul's favor. So I started looking into it more. Nearly all, especially any major poll, will only allow one vote per IP. Ok, so so a few Paul supporters maybe have access to very large blocks of IPs... possible. BUT then I found this:

Fox News Poll Results, BY REGION

image from poll at time I looked at it:


THIS really makes the accusation of 'bots' or large blocks of IPs being used to skew results EXTREMELY unlikely. IP geo-referencing would make any easy means of faking results difficult at best. For example if you had a very large block of IPs they will be routed to a single provider, or few at best, and would show up as a big spike for Paul in a specific city/region. It would be much much harder to have enough IPs spread out in nearly all territories in the US to get the results shown from the foxnews poll.